A law dealing with child abduction

[Sneakiecat]

So DJ, (since no one else here seems to be capable of hypothetical conversation)

What if we made it a law allowing parents to offer immunity to someone who had kidnapped their kid, as a part of a deal, like a ransom?

Yup, because these great things that you say will prevent this happening don't work in real life.

 

[Abcinthia]

My law would have done nothing of the sort, unless if he had returned her before she was sexually abused and held for years.. I'm thinking that would have been a good thing, though, right?



Wow I can't believe your using that same point against me AGAIN.

"I'm an adult, and a parent, so I know best, you stupid little child!"

I think where they are coming from is that when you have chlidren, your opinions might change. It's not the fact you are stupid or anything. How old are you you 16? 17? I became a mother at 17 and God it changed my opinions on a lot of things.

 

[Sneakiecat]

And on that note, I'm going to fix dinner for my child that I hope never has to deal with the "it's OK he kidnapped you because he didn't hurt you" trauma that seems to be acceptable to you.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

I can see where you are coming from, the concept of the law is to protect the innocent, over the punishment of the guility. The famous quote from English Law, paraphrased, "It is better for 10 guilty to walk than 1 innocent to suffer" supports this.

However, I don't feel that your argument constitutes anything near that, because it concentrates on the pardoning of the guilty after the suffer of innocents. You remove the deterrance utilised by crime vs punishment, the staple principal on how the whole system of protecting the innocent rests upon.

Well the deterrence isn't completely removed. They are still put on probation and they get no more chances. And it isn't like "If we catch you, and you have the child, then you don't get charged" it's "If you willingly hand over the child or turn yourself in, then you don't get charged."

So people can't simply kidnap children and if they get caught they get immunity. THey have to actually turn themselves/child in, do you get what I mean?

 

[GuesSAngel]

My law would have done nothing of the sort, unless if he had returned her before she was sexually abused and held for years.. I'm thinking that would have been a good thing, though, right?



Wow I can't believe your using that same point against me AGAIN.

"I'm an adult, and a parent, so I know best, you stupid little child!"

yep that's exactly what i said. actually wait. no. it wasn't what i said. it's something you don't know about and you're being an ass saying that he might not be a good parent?? give me a break.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

And on that note, I'm going to fix dinner for my child that I hope never has to deal with the "it's OK he kidnapped you because he didn't hurt you" trauma that seems to be acceptable to you.

It may not be acceptable, but it's a lot more 'acceptable' then the death of that child would be.

 

[GuesSAngel]

I think where they are coming from is that when you have chlidren, your opinions might change. It's not the fact you are stupid or anything. How old are you you 16? 17? I became a mother at 17 and God it changed my opinions on a lot of things.

yep. there ya go. you hit the target. but there were other times even though she's not a parent she knows what it's like to be one :smiley24:

 

[Goat Whisperer]

yep that's exactly what i said. actually wait. no. it wasn't what i said. it's something you don't know about and you're being an ass saying that he might not be a good parent?? give me a break.

:eng_mofo

 

[Dakota Jim]

So DJ, (since no one else here seems to be capable of hypothetical conversation)

What if we made it a law allowing parents to offer immunity to someone who had kidnapped their kid, as a part of a deal, like a ransom?

Parents (and I am one) are emotionally driven. If you said, "I blow up New York and I return your child", bye bye Jets, Yankees, and great pizza.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

yep. there ya go. you hit the target. but there were other times even though she's not a parent she knows what it's like to be one :smiley24:

It's more like GeusS is trying to undermine what I say by calling me a child and inexperienced because she is incapable of debating me. :dunno

 

[Goat Whisperer]

Parents (and I am one) are emotionally driven. If you said, "I blow up New York and I return your child", bye bye Jets, Yankees, and great pizza.

So you would do anything to get your child back? Even offer the kidnapper immunity, right?

 

[Dakota Jim]

So you would do anything to get your child back? Even offer the kidnapper immunity, right?

Of course just as any parent would. But, we are a country of many parents, many children....we need to consider us all not just me.

 

[GuesSAngel]

It's more like GeusS is trying to undermine what I say by calling me a child and inexperienced because she is incapable of debating me. :dunno

you're not throwing a good debate though...i'm not the only one who agrees with this. you obviously can't read since i never actually called you a 'child'. Inexperienced as you say, yes you are with certain things...but that will come with life. debating you, again you're not throwing a good debate.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

Of course just as any parent would. But, we are a country of many parents, many children....we need to consider us all not just me.

So how would it effect the rest of the country?

 

[Goat Whisperer]

you're not throwing a good debate though...i'm not the only one who agrees with this. you obviously can't read since i never actually called you a 'child'. Inexperienced as you say, yes you are with certain things...but that will come with life. debating you, again you're not throwing a good debate.

Others are throwing a good debate, a debate better then mine; but your arguments have been few and weak.

Just because others who agree with you are better at debating me, doesn't mean you are better at debating me.

 

[GuesSAngel]

Others are throwing a good debate, a debate better then mine; but your arguments have been few and weak.

Just because others who agree with you are better at debating me, doesn't mean you are better at debating me.

again you like to throw things in there that i didn't say....but whatever live in your little world. i like to read entire posts and not skim over them :nod:

 

[Goat Whisperer]

I made this thread to discuss the 'law' in question, not really to debate it. I never said I 100% agreed with making this law, but that I would debate pro for it since obviously no one else would. You have to admit there are some reasons why this law could be good, but in the end I agree, the risks would, most likely, out weigh the benefits.

 

[Dakota Jim]

So how would it effect the rest of the country?

It would mean that I in my personal and emotional decision would let a offendor roam at the cost of untold pain to other parents somewhere, sometime.

 

[Alien Allen]

What reasons do you have for saying they would be more likely to abduct a second child then they would to not to?

My reasons for them being less likely include: They are on probation and monitored. The community is aware of them because they are on the sex offenders list. They know there is no second chance this time and don't want to attempt it because of that.

Yes they might be just as likely as they would have been without this law to kill a child a second time, but more likely too abduct them? No. The opposite is true.

Right now people that kidnap are well aware they get no 2nd chance.

What is the difference ???

You really have some strange beliefs.

Did you sniff too much Polar Bear pooh???:eek

 

[Goat Whisperer]

Right now people that kidnap are well aware they get no 2nd chance.

What is the difference ???

You really have some strange beliefs.

Did you sniff too much Polar Bear pooh???:eek

It does smell pretty good... :willy_nilly: